How is this acceptable?

[HorseshoeHermit]

How can a player maintain his self-respect and indulge in Beyond Earth at this point? I don't want this to be a troll thread, but I must admit, it is difficult to separate out the question from the consequent criticism if there is no satisfactory answer.
Moderator Action: Implying that those who play CivBE can not have self respect is trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Beyond Earth is full of balance issues. Endemic balance issues. The AI is crap. The aliens are a snore; you can sleep on them. The health system is a snore. The world has less interactivity than Alpha Centauri; not that it's easy to beat SMAC in that department, but try thinking of what more than which this game is interactive. On top of that, the game is aesthetically dead. Miasma and aliens are impediments, nothing more. Ecological damage is not even a thing. Leaders are boring, not just that, but the AI is bad in exactly the way it was bad before, which everybody knew about.

These guys own a very valuable IP in the Civ series, and I want Civ to be the best it can be. That's not going to happen when players pre-order from a company with known late-comer patch practices. Remember Civ V, and how it wasn't even a game until G&K? Both of which you paid for?
What's that about fool me twice?

But my question is one of time. How can someone defend any behaviour of taking the game seriously in this state?
I do honestly expect to gain some insight in a deeper way to recreation, the game industry, or other things, but that point about not wanting to let Firaxis get sloppy is my highest motivating factor.

 

[Halbbruder]

I reckon the main balance issues are found in the virtues tree. Prosperity has become the new tradition from civ 5, as it contains 3 decent health bonuses and 1 health synergy bonus. Industry is the next best, then might and then knowledge, which is more of a support policy to prosperity than a starting virtue. Knowledge tree needs an additional health policy and its t1 policies should be a little more effective. I also think the second t1 synergy bonus is rather weak.

As military upgrades are tied to affinity, it compels players that are behind to engage in an arms race so it's a great reference to what has happened in human history and what is happening today. I don't think there are any particular balance issues, although the level 4 unique affinity units should be a bit later in game by 1 or 2 levels.

Domination victory is more viable than it used to be in civ 5, which is good, but I reckon there should be further layers of health penalties beyond -20 health. Something like:

-20 or less health: 200% intrigue level, -20% science, -20% culture, -50% growth, -10% production, halved outpost growth
-30 or less health: cannot build new colonists or settle new outposts, -30% science, -30% culture, growth is stalled in all cities, -20% production, -10% combat penalty, -10% energy per turn.
-40 or less health: 300% intrigue level, intrigue restrictions lifted, -40% science, -40% culture, no growth, no new cities, -30% production, -20% combat penalty, -20% energy per turn.

This would still encourage warmongering, but up to a point where it becomes very uncomfortable. In civ 5, warmongering required hoarding happiness before attacking, but this would be a sensible balance.

 

[Drowsy Emperor]

The balance issues are just one part of an overall sloppy product. Even if it did not have SMAC to drag it down, it would still be an all around average strategy game (neither terrible nor good) and would not have sold a quarter of the copies its currently selling without the Firaxis name on it. It would probably have around 70 critic average on metacritic and nobody but die hard strategy fans would know about it. Like with Pandora: First contact.

I must admit I find it somewhat amusing to watch the Civ V crowd tear this game down after Firaxis did everything to court the casual strategy or even non strategy gamer with that game. After all, if the gameplay model of Civ V was so good why are they now hating on the game for giving more of the same?

They ditched the strategy of the series in favor of entertainment. Well then, entertain them now Firaxis.

BE is dead, only the most hardcore will buy the possible expansion and I doubt most of them will pay full price for it. The real deal is Civ VI.

What they do with Civ VI will show if all that's left of Firaxis is the name.

 

[m15a]

Is the OP suggesting that anyone that is playing/bought BE is a fool with no self-respect? Just checking if I am understanding correctly.

 

[Ryoga]

Is the OP suggesting that anyone that is playing/bought BE is a fool with no self-respect? Just checking if I am understanding correctly.

There's a minor misunderstanding.
He didn't include those who simply "bought" it.

 

[MechMedic130]

I'm confident they'll get it all sorted out sooner rather than later. I think Firaxis is a pretty good company about supporting their titles and correcting short comings. I have no problem giving them money even if the game isn't perfect upon release, it'll get there. For now I'm still having fun, though I'm feeling like I'll drift back to Civ V soon.

 

[Selereth]

I've already lost 40+ hours of my life to this game, so I guess it could be worse. There are games that I haven't even broken 10 hours in because they just were not interesting to me. I can live with the majority of the flaws, for the time being. Except for the missing combat animations.

 

[m15a]

There's a minor misunderstanding.
He didn't include those who simply "bought" it.

"Remember Civ V, and how it wasn't even a game until G&K? Both of which you paid for?
What's that about fool me twice?"

Implying that we should feel ashamed for being fooled into buying BE.

 

[poom3619]

To think of it. By the time the game on Steam sale, it could be drastically balanced and expanded... maybe.

The balance issues are just one part of an overall sloppy product. Even if it did not have SMAC to drag it down, it would still be an all around average strategy game (neither terrible nor good) and would not have sold a quarter of the copies its currently selling without the Firaxis name on it. It would probably have around 70 critic average on metacritic and nobody but die hard strategy fans would know about it. Like with Pandora: First contact.

I must admit I find it somewhat amusing to watch the Civ V crowd tear this game down after Firaxis did everything to court the casual strategy or even non strategy gamer with that game. After all, if the gameplay model of Civ V was so good why are they now hating on the game for giving more of the same?

They ditched the strategy of the series in favor of entertainment. Well then, entertain them now Firaxis.

BE is dead, only the most hardcore will buy the possible expansion and I doubt most of them will pay full price for it. The real deal is Civ VI.

What they do with Civ VI will show if all that's left of Firaxis is the name.

Well, it got Sid Meier's name on it, and it's followed by Civilization. What else would probably go wrong? The game.

I would disagree that BE is the same as Civ5. Yeah, it was bearable compared to Civ5 vanilla release but that's not good enough, and it's possible that CivBE isn't even completed as a mod of Civ5 BNW or even what the dev claim it'll have. If you go to Civ Beyond Earth's wikia and read few articles, which probably got informations from media and then see how it marginally resemble the game we currently have.

I doubt that strategy fan will be entertained if you make gameplay more simple or easier. Don't forget that there are a thread by one who claimed to beat Apollo, the hardest difficulty in a day after release.

Well, I believe we in the Civfanatic probably learned the lesson about how Firaxis make the game. I would followed Civ6 but wouldn't expect much from it's release.

 

[Victus Mortuus]

I'm just thankful to all the people who take their time out to make mods for us fools as without some of the mods I have been using I'd have dropped this game after my transcendence victory.

 

[Joch]

Is the OP suggesting that anyone that is playing/bought BE is a fool with no self-respect? Just checking if I am understanding correctly.

Yes, the OP is trolling pure and simple. Stating your point of view is one thing, insulting every player you don't agree with is another.

I "indulge" in BE and don't feel the need to justify why to anyone, certainly not the OP.

Moderator Action: Please report a post that is trolling instead of publicly posting that a poster is trolling. Thanks
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[AriochIV]

I'm still having fun playing the game; I don't think that requires any justification.

Sure, the game has serious balance issues that will make it less fun to play over time, but I don't see anything wrong that can't be fixed with balance patches.

The AI is bad, and we all knew it was going to be bad, so let's not pretend to be shocked about it. It just needs to be a bit more aggressive on the harder levels.

 

[Quineloe]

The game has massive issues, network stability is a joke still and many things really need the nerfhammer.

However, it boils down to this:
There's nothing else to play.

 

[Nikolai II]

Balanced or not, it's a fun game.

 

[Civking5]

The game is definitely fun to play, but after playing close to 40 hours, it is clear that it needs two or three patches mainly to get better balancing.

It seems need for patching is something that has become common for all games these days. All the new games that i got recently; Rome 2 total war, Charlemagne expansion for crusader kings 2, stronghold crusader 2 all got patched after release one way or antoher... EU4 had a new DLC released last week (art of war), and already list of bugs are piling up to get fixed in a patch...

...

BE is dead, only the most hardcore will buy the possible expansion and I doubt most of them will pay full price for it. The real deal is Civ VI.

What they do with Civ VI will show if all that's left of Firaxis is the name.

BE is not dead. Right now. it is the third most purchased game on steam. i remember when civ5 got released some people were saying the same thing, even some with their great wisdom were suggesting that Firaxis must drop civ 5 immediately and move on to civ6 ... now look what a great success civ5 has become...Some people in here has developed such a hatred for civ 5 and civ:BE that their views and posts basically adds nothing meaningful to the discussions in this forum.

 

[tesb]

However, it boils down to this:
There's nothing else to play

imho endless legend is the far superior game at the moment, with the latest patch the ai got a bit more competitive and the core game is in a much better shape (especially it is something quite different than the the very conservative BE which barely evolved compared to ciV).

 

[terraslayer]

Regardless of whether there are many bugs or not, we bought this game because it's a civ game, and we love civ games. People should realize nowadays that releasing buggy games and patching it later is the norm rather than the exception. So it should come as no surprise to anyone about the way the game was released. Regardless, it's a fun game in its own right.

Reminds me of when Rome 2 Total War was released, so much outcry about the buggyness of the game (and believe me that game was WAY MORE BUGGED than this one, almost to unplayable). Well the point is that this game is playable at least and not many people have crash issues, so the only issue is really a balancing one. Meh.

 

[Legedi]

I've already stopped playing after 1.5 games. Sure it has a lot of the same problems Civ5 had, but that game was a radical change from Civ4. Civ:BE (using the same engine as Civ5) doesn't even do a lot of the old things right (UI crap, AI crap, boring victory conditions, etc.)

Companies don't stay in the "always preorder" forever. Unless patches, not dlc or expansions, fix this Fraxis is off my preorder list.

 

[Aeson]

BE is fun. I'd rather it wasn't 1UPT and that balance was better, but can't argue with $50 for 100+ hours and counting of enjoyment so far.

As for balance, exploits, and AI ... Civ I, II, and SMAC all were similar in those respects to BE. The AI was barely a factor, there were wildly broken exploits. For their time, the graphics were roughly similar (nice enough, but nothing special). Civ was and now is once again an empire building game with some minor actors thrown in to have someone to beat on.

III introduced an AI that actually was difficult to beat at the highest levels, but still had a lot of imbalances, exploits, and oversights (no MP at release...)

But they were all awesome games and I probably put at least 2k hours into each. If they can hit that level, I'll always buy. Maybe it would be better if they could charge $200 per copy (which kinda is what t hey do with DLC and Expansions) and we get a polished game at release, but I'm not sure that's economically feasible.

 

[Kutuzov]

However, it boils down to this:
There's nothing else to play.

Eh? Maybe there's no real competition for Civ V as it covers historical empires from the dawn of time through to the near-future but Civ BE has at least one direct competitor which some posters here prefer: Pandora :First Contact. It's very similar but made with a lower budget which apparently didn't stretch to providing any meaningful documentation at all If you've played Civ V or BE, Pandora is quick to pick up.

And, as others have posted as well, there is Endless Legend. I play Distant Worlds as well as Galactic Civ 2. There are so many games to play that it's tough deciding which one to play next.